paperclip_update_company

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. Description adds the critical behavioral nuance that board-level authentication is required and agent keys are rejected (403). Error codes (401, 403, 404) are listed. No contradiction with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Well-structured with distinct sections (warning, args, returns, examples, error handling). Every sentence adds value. Could be slightly more concise, but the organization aids readability.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite no output schema, description explains the return value ('updated company object with all fields and updated timestamps'). Covers authentication, error handling, parameter nuances, and usage context. Complete for a 4-parameter mutation tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Input schema has 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by providing example UUID, clarifying nullable description to clear, and stating budgetMonthlyCents must be a non-negative integer. These details enrich parameter understanding beyond the schema alone.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clearly states 'Update a company's name, description, or monthly budget', specifying verb and resource. Distinguishes from paperclip_archive_company by explicitly recommending it for archiving instead.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit 'Use when' and 'Don't use when' sections, naming an alternative tool (paperclip_archive_company) and noting the board-level authentication requirement.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.